A New Legal Paradigm Front Cyberspace? The Effect of the Information Age on the Law

Technology in Society

Volumn 18, Issue 3 SPEC. ISS., 1996, Pages 357-371

  Cavazos, Edward A ^a   Morin, Gavino ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042039136     PISSN: 0160791X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0160-791X(96)00019-X     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Carter v. Carter Coal, 298 U.S. 238 (1936).
2. U.S. v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941).
3. Id. at 123.
4. Helvering v. Davis 301 U.S. 619, 641 (1937).
5. "Cyberspace," the term, was coined by the acclaimed science-fiction author William Gibson as "a graphic representation of data abstracted from the banks of every computer in the world." W. Gibson, Neuromancer 51 (1984). Since then, the term has been adopted as a common way of referring to the Internet and similar services. E. A. Cavazos and G. Morin, Cyberspace and The Law: Your Rights and Duties in the On-line World, 1 (1994).
6. "Cyberspace," the term, was coined by the acclaimed science-fiction author William Gibson as "a graphic representation of data abstracted from the banks of every computer in the world." W. Gibson, Neuromancer 51 (1984). Since then, the term has been adopted as a common way of referring to the Internet and similar services. E. A. Cavazos and G. Morin, Cyberspace and The Law: Your Rights and Duties in the On-line World, 1 (1994).
7. Although only first amendment and privacy law are discussed here, other areas of Internet-related law show equally signifigant evolution. See e.g., E. A. Cavazos and G. Chin Chao, System Operator Liability for a User's Copyright Infringement, 4 Tx. Int. Prop. L.J. 13 (1995) (copyright liability issues).
8. 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
9. Cubby v. CompuServe, 776 F.Supp. 135, 139-41 (S.D.N.Y.1991).
10. The most noted analogous first amendment protection arose in the context of adult bookstore owners who are immune from criminal liability when unknowingly disseminating otherwise punishable obscene material. Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147, 155 (1959). See also Religious Technology v. Netcom On-Line Communication Services, Inc., - F. Supp. - (N.D. Cal. 1995) (holding that system operator's are immune from copyright liability without knowledge of the infringing act).
11. Stratton-Oakmont v. Prodigy, 1995 WL 323710 (S.D.N.Y., May 26, 1995)(unpublished decision).
12. An excellent review of the common carrier approach and its applicability (or inapplicability) to the new computer-related communication technologies can be found in Note, The Message in the Medium: The First Amendment on the Information Superhighway, 107 Harv. L. Rev. 1062 (1994).
13. Western Union Tel. V. Lesesne, 182 F.2d 135, 137 (5th Cir. 1950).
14. Carlin Communications, Inc. v. Mountain States Tel. and Tel. Co., 827 F.2d 1291, 1294 (9th Cir. 1987) ("Once the telephone company becomes a medium for public rather than private communication, the fit of traditional common carrier law becomes much less snug."), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1029 (1988).
15. Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tomillo, 418 U.S. 241, 247-258 (1974).
16. R. Charles, Computer Bulletin Boards and Defamation: Who Should Be Liable? Under What Standard?, 2 J.L and Tech 121 (1987).
17. E. A. Cavazos, Computer Bulletin Boards and the Right of Reply: Redefining Defamation Liability for a New Technology, 12 Rev. of Lit. 231 (1992).
18. 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
19. U.S. v. Thomas, - F.3d. - (6th Cir. 1996).
20. Branscomb, Anne Wells, Anonymity, Autonomy, and Accountability: Challenges to the First Amendment in Cyberspaces, 104 Yale L. J. 1639 (1995).
21. Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969).
22. D. E. Denning, Encrypted Speech is Not Speech, 1 (Jan. 16, 1994)(unpublished manuscript), cited in A. Michael Froomkin, The Metaphor Is the Key: Cryptography, the Clipper Chip, and the Constitution, 143 Yale 709 (1995).
23. D. E. Denning, Encrypted Speech is Not Speech, 1 (Jan. 16, 1994)(unpublished manuscript), cited in A. Michael Froomkin, The Metaphor Is the Key: Cryptography, the Clipper Chip, and the Constitution, 143 Yale 709 (1995).
24. Froomkin, supra note 19.
25. McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 63 U.S.L.W. 4279 (U.S. April 18, 1995).
26. Id.
27. This type of change undoubtedly occured with the advent of printing technology, another communication revolution. See M. Ethan Katsh, Rights, Camera, Action: Cyberspatial Settings and the First Amendment, 104 Yale L.J. 1681 (1995).
28. S.652 (1996) and H.R.1555 (1996), passed Feb. 1, 1996.